Fables of the reconstruction

No Platinum Coin - Now, Let's Get to the Substance

I am not sorry about this development:

The U.S. Treasury Department said on Saturday it will not produce platinum coins as a way of generating $1 trillion in revenue and avoiding a battle in Congress over raising the U.S. debt ceiling.

I've never looked into the relevant statutes and cases, so I have no idea about the legality of minting the coin. I assume it's a "political question" that a federal court is likely to avoid deciding.

I didn't embrace the idea for two reasons: First, while posing little economic risk by itself, I was afraid Republicans would engage in unpredictably irrational behavior in response to the coin that would wreak catastrophic damage. The logical response to the minting of the coin is lifting the debt ceiling to repurchase it. But the national GOP is controlled largely by a group of nutters who do not care what the consequences of their actions are. 

Second, if minting the coin had worked, I think it would have just punted on the very important issue that the national GOP is controlled largely by a group of nutters who do not care what the consequences of their actions are. A showdown over the debt ceiling focuses the public's attention on that. Every time the issue comes to a head, the GOP gets more unpopular. I think the President has noticed that.

I think some people rightly fear that negotiating with the GOP over the debt ceiling risks giving things away that we shouldn't. But I look at it like this: If I am negotiating with a hostage-taker, I am willing to send in some pizza and soda, so long as no one I care about gets shot in the end. If Obama gives them some symbolic victory, like the fiscally meaningless estate tax deal that just went down a couple of weeks ago, I'm fine with it. 

Remembrance

Five years ago yesterday, Andy Olmsted was killed by a sniper in Iraq.  It was a tragedy for the people who knew him, and for those of us who followed his blog posts.

Since then, over 20,000 Iraqi civilians died as a result of the U.S. invasion of their country. 

All excellent reasons not to go to war when you don't have to.

Demographics are Not Destiny

People talking about demographics have the wrong end of the stick. White conservatives don't vote for white conservative candidates because they're white, they vote for them because white supremacy is at the core of American conservatism. So long as Republicans continue to embrace distrust and fear of non-white people and of women, they will continue to lose those constituencies. It's possible conservatives can change (although I don't see how), so this problem is fixable. And I hope they do fix it, because we'd all be better off if the Confederacy finally accepted defeat.

The Rocket Science of Elections

So what have we learned from all this?

1. Money alone will not buy an election, especially when you tell your opponents you're trying to buy the election.

2. Having a based motivated soley by antipathy for the other guy will not win an election. 

3. Having a great ground game, enough money to be competitive, and a base motivated by support for your guy (and antipathy for the other guy) will win an election.

The Unflattering Truth

Avedon Carol provides an illustration of why liberals are so bad at politics:

It's lost in the mists of time for me, but does anyone remember who came up with (and who promoted) the idea that liberal ideology is hard to defend and explain because it's all so "nuanced"?

She calls this "the flattering lie" - I'm not sure why it's supposed to be flattering - and says liberal ideology is easy to understand.

One implication of this argument is that anyone who claims not to understand liberal ideology is arguing in bad faith. Commenters reinforce this:

It's not hard to understand, unless you're dead set against understanding. I call it being aggressively stupid. Other people have a more polite term.

Another is that liberals suck:

It's not a question of liberalism being complex, it's a question of so many liberals not really believing in equality, justice, etc. , that the actual substance of liberalism is worth the effort of fighting for and risking any real personal sacrifice for. That's how liberalism has died.

Talk about "the flattering lie". If there is one, it's that things would be going great if everyone else were as principled and morally good as you.

The problem with Carol's argument is that she's talking about rhetoric, not politics. Rhetoric is essential but not sufficient for effective politics. Rhetoric is about getting people to think what you want them to think. Politics is about getting people to do what you want them to do. We've seen time and again that people who agree with many liberal ideas and policies in general still vote for conservative politicians. That's because conservatives can make their politics simple, while liberals can't.

Consider the following:

• Free-market capitalism is the source of all wealth. Anything that interferes with the free market reduces wealth and therefore all regulation of business:

1. should be carefully crafted to avoid undue interference with the market.
2. should be designed to avoid market failures by promoting dissemination of information, reducing barriers to entry, and countering anti-competitive practices.
3. is evil and should be repealed.

Contrast that with:

• The concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny minority of people creates a bias in the political system which caters to the interests of those people and undermines the principles of liberty and equality on which the country was founded. Therefore, as a nation we should:

1. promote institutions that counter the creation or persistence of such bias including campaign finance laws, whistleblower statutes, strong independent oversight, and aggressive investigative reporting.
2. create laws and policies to mitigate the concentration of wealth by placing the greatest share of the cost of government on the wealthy using progressive taxation.
3. kill the rich, take their money, and distribute it to the poor.

I think the point is self-evident: Almost no liberals answering the second question would choose the third answer or vote for politicians who took that position. A majority of conservatives answering the first question would do both. Conservative politics are simple and liberal politics are not.

Liberals value fairness, conservatives value power. A message of power is always easier to sell than fairness. As someone wrote:

World's run by fear, you see. Can't sell pipe dreams, can't rule with charity, no good at all. Not in the real world. Promise to build a chap a house, he won't believe you. Threaten to burn his place down, he'll do what you tell him. Fact of life.

Conservatives have built a narrative of virtuous strength versus degenerative weakness that is cohesive and, again, simple, and marketed it relentlessly. Liberals could not concoct and peddle such a simplistic story. Again, we value fairness while the other side does not. We refuse to sell what we wouldn't buy; conservative leaders do it every day. A liberal will never be able to appeal to a voter's baser instincts and remain a liberal; a conservative will never be able to appeal to a voter's better instincts and remain a conservative. But it's easier to appeal to the baser instincts, and that's not flattery or a lie.

DOMA: Fantacism For its Own Sake

The law firm that House Republican hired to defend DOMA decided to drop the representation. The lawyer at the firm who agreed to take the case, Paul Clement, quit, saying:

Defending unpopular positions is what lawyers do. The adversary system of justice depends on it, especially in cases where the passions run high.

Which I agree with, wholeheartedly.

He also says:

Efforts to delegitimize any representation for one side of a legal controversy are a profound threat to the rule of law.

Here's the fun part.

Clement will join the firm Bancroft PLLC, a small D.C.-based litigation boutique founded by former assistant U.S. attorney general Viet Dinh.

Who is Viet Dinh? Recall:

[Viet] Dinh, [principal author of the USA PATRIOT Act,] now a Georgetown law professor, urged the CPAC faithful to carve out a Bush exception to their ideological principle of limited government. "The conservative movement has a healthy skepticism of governmental power, but at times, unfortunately, that healthy skepticism needs to yield," Dinh explained, invoking Osama bin Laden.

Dinh brought the crowd to a raucous ovation when he judged: "The threat to Americans' liberty today comes from al Qaeda and its associates and the people who would destroy America and her people, not the brave men and women who work to defend this country!"

(Emphasis supplied.)

So Paul Clement quits over the principle that everyone, including bigots, have the right to due process, and goes to work with Viet Dinh, who doesn't seem to think much of limits on government power when it comes to "national security". And, I'll ask again, just who is Dinh referring to when he mentioned "the people who would destroy America", apart from al Qaeda? Any Americans on that list?

 

 

Republican War on the Poor

Assholes:

Under a new budget proposal from State Sen. Bruce Casswell, children in the state’s foster care system would be allowed to purchase clothing only in used clothing stores.  ...

His explanation?

“I never had anything new,” Caswell says. “I got all the hand-me-downs. And my dad, he did a lot of shopping at the Salvation Army, and his comment was — and quite frankly it’s true — once you’re out of the store and you walk down the street, nobody knows where you bought your clothes.”

Under his plan, foster children would receive gift cards that could only be used at places like the Salvation Army, Goodwill and other second hand clothing stores.

Hey, thrift stores have some nice stuff, but I don't think it's that much cheaper than Wal-Mart. This amounts to another step in the never-ending effort by rightwingers to humiliate the poor, with the bonus that it diverts dollars to religious organizations.  Grasping Christian fundamentalism continues to spread its tenacles.

Crazy Curt in Libya

Oh great, Curt Weldon is in Libya, meeting with Gaddafi. No comment from the White House. Odd and a little worrying.

Kicking Whole Household Off Food Stamps If One Family Member Strikes Is Not New, Not Workable

Brendan Skwire says that the Republicans' recent initiative to kick all family members of striking workers off food stamps is actually a policy adopted originally ... in 1981.  Why haven't we heard about it? Because, he says, it's largely symbolic:

[W]hile the language is offensive, it’s largely unworkable if the idea is to kick people already receiving [food stamps] off the program. When you apply, there’s a requirement to report if you’re on strike. If you’re already receiving SNAP, it’s a lot harder to determine that, simply due to the fact that the welfare offices where the majority of SNAP cases are handled are overworked, understaffed, inefficient, and in general swamped. ... [N]o one has the time (or for that matter the resources) to go through every applicant’s files to see which ones belong to unions and which unions are on strike at any given time. The only way this “policy” (and I’m using the term charitably) could work is if a striker went into the county assistance office and said “hey guys, those food stamps i’m getting? Cancel them, I’m on strike”.

There you have it: A great example of the real beauty of the internet, where people who actually know things tell other people who don't.

Christian Gang Members

Duncan:

[A] piece of religion in this country for a lot of people is a basic kind of ethnic tribalism. Most people aren't genuinely very religious and most of those who profess to be don't have any kind of sophisticated understanding of what their religion is supposed to be. They do know what team they play for, and that's important.

Right. See this local example from a few years ago:

Mrs. Dobrich said she had asked the board to develop policies that would leave no one feeling excluded because of faith. People booed and rattled signs that read "Jesus Saves," she recalled. Her son had written a short statement, but he felt so intimidated that his sister read it for him. In his statement, Alex, who was 11 then, said: "I feel bad when kids in my class call me 'Jew boy.' I do not want to move away from the house I have lived in forever."

Later, another speaker turned to Mrs. Dobrich and said, according to several witnesses, "If you want people to stop calling him ‘Jew boy,’ you tell him to give his heart to Jesus."

Humans are social animals, but belonging to a tribe - otherwise known as being in a gang - is a basic unit of "society". It requires a higher level of abstract reasoning to consider yourself a member of a group that primarily includes people you don't know and who may look and behave in ways very different from you. 

Nationalism is a common way of conjuring this higher level of belonginess. In America, nationalism was made possible by the exclusion of blacks from the definition of "American."  Once that notion was undermined, whites started either turning away from nationalism or re-defined "the nation" using their own idiosyncratic measures. The rise of the Christian gang as a political force in America is the result of both of these reactions.  On one hand, white conservatives have to some extent become Christians first and Americans second. On the other, Christians have conflated Americanism and Christianity, and thereby imported the requirements of the bigoted form of the first - xenophobia, militarism, exceptionalism - into the second. To conservatives, they are the nation, and anyone who is "other" must be silent or be driven out.

House GOP Getting Right to Work Stoking Xenophobia

Here we go:

The Republican who will head the House committee that oversees domestic security is planning to open a Congressional inquiry into what he calls “the radicalization” of the Muslim community when his party takes over the House next year.

Representative Peter T. King of New York, who will become the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said he is responding to what he has described as frequent concerns raised by law enforcement officials that Muslim leaders have been uncooperative in terror investigations.

I will bet you $20 Pam Geller gets to address the committee.

Please notice this is all part of their plan to unseat Obama. Emphasizing the foreign, swarthy Islamic threat in our midst binds naturally to the addled conservative belief that Obama is a foreign-born Muslim.

Tennessee Mosque Trial Turns Into Anti-Muslim "Circus"

Oh yeah, it's just about parking:

Islam is suddenly on trial in a booming Nashville suburb, where opponents of a new mosque have spent six days in court trying to link it to what they claim is a conspiracy to take over America by imposing restrictive religious rule. 

The hearing is supposed to be about whether Rutherford County officials violated Tennessee's open meetings law when they approved the mosque's site plan.

Instead, plaintiff's attorney Joe Brandon Jr. has used it as a forum to question whether the world's second-biggest faith even qualifies as a religion, and to push a theory that American Muslims want to replace the Constitution with extremist Islamic law.  "Do you want to know about a direct connection between the Islamic Center and Shariah law, a.k.a. terrorism?" Brandon asked one witness in a typical line of questioning.

...

At one point, he asked whether Rutherford County Commissioner Gary Farley supported hanging a whip in his house as a warning to his wife and then beating her with it, something Brandon claimed was part of "Shariah religion." 

The commissioner protested that he would never beat his wife. 

County attorney Jim Cope objected to the question, saying, "This is a circus."

The magistrate conducting the trial is allowing all of this prejudicial, irrelevant testimony in because -- the article speculates -- there is no jury and the judge has the power to simply strike irrelevant evidence in the end and rule based on the relevant facts. If this is true, he's giving the plaintiffs leeway to prove their case so they can't even plausibly claim they haven't had their day in court.

The less-cheerful scenario is that the magistrate really believes the testimony of Frank Gaffney that "Shariah, and by extension the new mosque, poses a threat to America" is actually relevant.

This kind of thing isn't new in America. I've been reading about the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II while arguing about a different wingnut hobbyhorse, and seeing the parallels:

Concerns over the loyalty of ethnic Japanese seemed to stem as much from racial prejudice than evidence of actual malfeasance. Major Karl Bendetsen and Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt, head of the Western Command, each questioned Japanese American loyalty. DeWitt, who administered the internment program, repeatedly told newspapers that "A Jap's a Jap" and testified to Congress,

I don't want any of them [persons of Japanese ancestry] here. They are a dangerous element. There is no way to determine their loyalty... It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen, he is still a Japanese. American citizenship does not necessarily determine loyalty... But we must worry about the Japanese all the time until he is wiped off the map.

DeWitt also sought approval to conduct search and seizure operations aimed at preventing alien Japanese from making radio transmissions to Japanese ships. The Justice Department declined, stating that there was no probable cause to support DeWitt's assertion, as the FBI concluded that there was no security threat. On January 2, the Joint Immigration Committee of the California Legislature sent a manifesto to California newspapers which attacked "the ethnic Japanese," whom it alleged were "totally unassimilable." This manifesto further argued that all people of Japanese heritage were loyal subjects of the Emperor of Japan; Japanese language schools, furthermore, according to the manifesto, were bastions of racism which advanced doctrines of Japanese racial superiority.

[Citations omitted.] So strong was the belief that people of Japanese descent were inherently disloyal, that infants in orphanages who had even "one drop of Japanese blood" were sent to orphanages in the concentration camps.

It's all there: The "we're not racists, they are", the Juan Williams-level belief that "they" are inherently disloyal and unassimilable, the equivalent of "Madrassa" hysteria, the eliminationist rhetoric. The people who hate and fear American Muslims today are the direct inheritors of those who hated and feared Japanese Americans.

It's All Downhill from Here

Listened with half an ear to Obama's press conference today.  He comes across as a man who is bemused by how other people behave in such a petty, illogical way.  No wonder people who don't like him really don't like him.

He said the same thing he always says, that he's willing to listen to good ideas no matter who they're from.  I didn't catch whether that caused a chuckle around the room. The idea of having a "Slurpee Summit" with the Republicans did.

Nothing about Obama or the Dem leadership makes me think they're going to be able to manage the Republicans any better now than they did the last couple of years.  The GOP has no reason to compromise on anything.  Saying no to everything has worked so far. They'll be even more bombastic and self-righteous about taxes and spending.  And they're disciplined enough that they'll just roll Obama and the Dems. The only hope is that infighting among the Republicans over who will get the credit for their glorious victories will cause them all to fail.

The Orcs are Here

Corbett wins, Toomey wins; Fitzpatrick beats Murphy.  That's about all you need to know.

What Republicans Will Do: Demonize and Demagogue

Thus far into Obama's presidency, the Republicans have done very well by being obstructionist.  Obama extends his hand and offers to work together, and they both slap it aside and call him divisive. Congressional Democrats adapt Republican ideas like cap and trade and the public option and the Republicans scream Nazi socialism. They haven't had a single positive idea, and for them that's a good thing.  A positive plan would just confuse their supporters. 

So, when the Republicans win the House, they will just continue to do what they've been doing:  Demonize and demagogue. Their primary mission will be to rail against the evils of the health insurance reform bill and make loud announcements about how they're going to slay it.  There will be lots of talk about making tax cuts for very, very wealthy people permanent in order to help "small business."  No matter what happens, they will never let DADT be repealed on their watch. Etc.

But to help further their cause, they'll do what the GOP always does: Sling mud.  I don't think even they are dumb enough to try to impeach Obama himself, but there will be lots of talk about it.  There will be inquiry upon hearing upon outraged press conference, spiced up with calls for independent counsel investigations. They pull a Breitbart and find some plausibly bad-seeming thing and use it to force some hapless official out of his or her job.  Then they'll bay at the moon, lick the blood from their chops, and lope off in search of another victim.

Decline of Empire

Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

Doesn't This Guy Watch CSI?

What a dumbass:

Two nationally known forensic  pathologists are questioning a sheriff’s deputy’s version of how he was shot in the remote desert south of Phoenix, adding to suspicions by some that the incident was a hoax timed to stoke the debate over illegal immigration. 

Deputy Louie Puroll of Pinal County told investigators he was following a group of smugglers carrying bales of marijuana on April 30 when he was ambushed by men firing AK-47 rifles. Deputy Puroll said he was grazed by a bullet in the back in what he described as a running gun battle.

The pathologists, Dr. Michael Baden of New York and Dr. Werner Spitz of the Detroit suburbs, examined photographs of the wound released by the sheriff’s office. They told The Associated Press on Friday that they had concluded that the bullet was fired from inches away, not at least 25 yards as Deputy Puroll had said. ...

It is “a close wound, not a distant wound, based on the appearance of the skin around the wound, which is normally what we forensic pathologists look at,” said Dr. Baden, a former New York City chief medical examiner who is currently working for the New York State Police. “We’re talking inches, not yards.”

Dr. Spitz, a former chief medical examiner of Detroit’s Wayne County and author of a death investigation textbook, held the same opinion.

“There’s almost no doubt that this is a muzzle-contact-type injury, with the muzzle flame singeing the skin right where the bullet went by,” Dr. Spitz said.

When asked if the bullet could have been from 25 yards away, he said, “No, it was not from one yard away.”

Of course, the deputy's boss is backing him and the right wing continues to have "proof" of the danger posed by migrants.

Thank You, Sarah Palin!

Thank you!

Thank you!

Thank you for throwing the GOP into disarray and retreat!

Update: Castle will not endorse O'Donnell. Excellent.  All we need is for him to imply support for Coons in the final days before November 2nd.

Let Them Eat Used Cake: Trashpicking Advice From Business Channel

On the local business fascist radio station yesterday, a commenter from CNBC gave tips on how to trashpick items that you might be able to use or sell: Know when bulk trash is picked up, take a vehicle with enough capacity to carry large things (and a friend to lift them), and go to rich neighborhoods. "Rich people have nicer stuff," she chirped.

I guess this is advice for white people, because can you imagine the reaction if black people were driving around a rich neighborhood digging through trash?

Sherrod to Sue Breitbart

Good. Presumably, the main claim will be defamation, but I hope she has a clever lawyer who can think up other things to slam that scumbag with.

Rightwing Terrorist Intended to Murder Workers at ACLU and Tides Foundation

It's funny how this terrorism story isn't playing nonstop on cable news:

Convicted felon Byron Williams loaded up his mother's Toyota Tundra with guns, strapped on his body armor and headed to San Francisco late Saturday night with one thing in mind: to kill workers at the American Civil Liberties Union and an environmental foundation, prosecutors say.

Williams, an anti-government zealot on parole for bank robbery, had hoped to "start a revolution" with the bloodshed at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation in San Francisco, authorities said.

But before he made it to the city, Williams was stopped at early Sunday by California Highway Patrol officers for speeding and driving erratically on westbound Interstate 580 west of Grand Avenue in Oakland.

Police say he then initiated a chaotic, 12-minute gunbattle with officers, firing a 9mm handgun, a .308-caliber rifle and a shotgun. He reloaded his weapons when he ran out of ammunition and stopped only after officers shot him in areas of his body not covered by his bullet-resistant vest, authorities said.

Good thing he's not a leftist or a Muslim or then we'd never hear the end of it.

None Dare Call it Terrorism

Nothing to see here:

Williams' mother, Janice Williams of Groveland, said her son had been living next door and taking care of her father's house and land. She said he had been released from prison about 2 1/2 years ago after a felony conviction, which she declined to describe, and had almost completed his parole.

"He hasn't been able to get a job because he's an ex-felon and nobody will hire him," she said.

She said her son, who had been a carpenter and a cabinetmaker before his imprisonment, was angry about his unemployment and about "what's happening to our country."

Williams watched the news on television and was upset by "the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items," his mother said.

She said she had planned to make salsa with her son on Sunday and was making preparations when she got a call from a television reporter, looked out the window and saw that her pickup truck was gone.

She said she then checked the locked safe where she kept her guns, all legally purchased and owned, and found that they were also missing.

Janice Williams said she kept the guns because "eventually, I think we're going to be caught up in a revolution." But she said she had told her son many times that "he didn't have to be on the front lines."

Hmm, let's guess what his felony conviction was for. A hate crime, perhaps?

Attorney General Corbett, PA GOP Candidate for Governor, Subpoenas Identity of Critical Blogger

This is an abuse of power:

The state Attorney General and Republican nominee for governor has subpoenaed Twitter seeking information about accounts connected to the blog, which is fiercely and ceaselessly critical of Corbett. The blog’s tagline is “Exposing the hypocrisy of Tom Corbett.” It has repeatedly hammered Corbett on the details of his Capitol corruption probe over the years.

The blog is Casablanca PA. The subpoena is here.

Obama Stole Her Guns!!

These people believe anything.

The Hard 50 For Scott Roeder

Colloquy at the sentencing hearing of Scott Roeder:

Roeder spoke about shooting Tiller at a church. "They were not holding Tiller accountable for his sins. Reformation Lutheran was not a true church," he said. Roeder then began to talk about members and pastors of the church. Judge Wilbert shut him down once again.

"It only takes one or two sentences to say I didn't believe it was a holy place ... The rest is just political diatribe," Wilbert said. After Roeder said he wanted to address expectant mothers, Wilbert stopped him again, saying, "I'm not going to provide you with an all-night political forum." ...

After Roeder spoke off his notes, Wilbert responded "You killed Dr. Tiller. You're not going to politically assassinate [District Attorney] Nola Foulston. I'm going to draw the line there."

"If you would follow a higher power, you would acquit me," Roeder said.

"If you think you're going to convince me with some last-minute plea, you're wasting your time," Wilbert responded. Wilbert said Roeder should focus on the Hard 50. "That's the only decision left today." ...

[Roeder:] "The blame for George Tiller's death lies more with the state of Kansas, than with me. You may sentence me to 25 or 50 years in prison but it does not serve justice in any way."

Roeder then read from a book by Paul Hill, who killed a Fla. doctor. "I agree with Paul Hill wholeheartedly." "God will avenge every drop of blood that stains Kansas grass," he continued. Roeder quoted the 10 Commandments and other Old Testament scripture.

"Give me liberty to defend the unborn or give me death," Roeder said.

Instead, the judge gave him a mandatory minimum of 50 years for the murder plus 2 consecutive 12-month sentences for assaults on witnesses to the assassination.

Several people testified on behalf of Roeder as character witnesses.  The ones named in the story are David Leach from Iowa, Regina Dinwiddie of Kansas City, Katherine Coons, and Eugene Frye. Each of these people bear watching by the police for any signs that they also are plotting terrorist acts.

As Roeder was taken from the courtroom, he shouted at the prosecutors, ""The blood of babies is on your hands, Nola Foulston ... And Ann Swegle." This is a clear call for their assassinations.

This is what you get when you allow people to use the rhetoric of "abortion is murder." 

Lie Down With Dogs

HA Ha!:

Dear Arthur,

This will memorialize our conversation at lunch today. Effective immediately, my position as a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute is terminated. I appreciate the consideration that delays my emptying of my office until after my return from travel next week. Premises will be vacated no later than April 9.     

I have had many fruitful years at the American Enterprise Institute, and I do regret this abrupt and unexpected conclusion of our relationship.     

Very truly yours,     

David Frum

What tools.

That's Why I Say Hey Man, Nice Shot

Eric Cantor is flailing. He says:

that a bullet flew through a window of his campaign office earlier this week, and he has received threatening emails – but he wouldn’t say they were in reaction to passage of the heath care overhaul.  

Probably because they weren't.

“I’ve received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I am Jewish,” Rep. Eric Cantor said in a statement.

He really went there. Okay, Eric, let's assume you're not lying about this also. Just play along, I know it's ridiculous. Do you think the people who hate you for being Jewish are registered Republicans or Democrats? Hmmm, let's see. I'm guessing they're not Democrats.

The Virginia Republican also said he wouldn’t release any of the emails because “I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent.”

Plus, they have nothing to do with health care and they're probably all racist garbage that obviously were not sent by liberals.

Now we have some facts from the Richmond P.D.:

The building, which has several tenants including an office used by Congressman Eric Cantor, was unoccupied at the time.

A Richmond Police detective was assigned to the case.  A preliminary investigation shows that a bullet was fired into the air and struck the window in a downward direction, landing on the floor about a foot from the window.  The round struck with enough force to break the windowpane but did not penetrate the window blinds.  There was no other damage to the room, which is used occasionally for meetings by the congressman.

A bullet was fired into the air and came down with just enough force to break glass in a building he shares with a bunch of other people and Cantor expects us to believe it was intentionally fired at his office? What a stupid lie.

The Party of No

Ridiculous children. All of them deserve to be spanked, but they'd only enjoy it.

Today's Poster

Source: Driftglass.

McCain and Lieberman Propose Bill to Strip U.S. Citizens Suspected of Terrorism of All Rights

Via Eric Martin, Marc Ambinder says:

A close reading of the [Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010] suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity

He's wrong. The bill does not "allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely". It requires it. It's not optional.

Section 2(a) of the bill (pdf):

MILITARY CUSTODY REQUIREMENT.—Whenever within the United States, its territories, and possessions, or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an individual is captured or otherwise comes into the custody or under the effective control of the United States who is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners through an act of terrorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war, or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities, and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes of initial interrogation and determination of status in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

(Emphasis supplied.)

This means that anyone, U.S. citizen or not, who is simply suspected of engaging in terrorism or "of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities" must be turned over to the military.

I know I am using italics a lot. I think this warrants it.

Section 3(b)(3):

A individual who is suspected of being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall not, during interrogation under this subsection, be provided the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) or otherwise be informed of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. Arizona.

I'm disappointed. Every self-respecting enemy belligerent, even unprivileged ones, know the Miranda warnings. This section should have read:

A individual who is suspected of being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall be provided with the following statement:

"We can do anything we want to you, and no one can stop us. We can rape you, we can burn you, we can kill you. And we're going to enjoy it."

At least that would have the virtue of honesty, if no other.

After the initial detention:

The bill asks the President to determine criteria for designating an individual as a "high-value detainee" if he/she: (1) poses a threat of an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the U.S. or U.S. facilities abroad; (2) poses a threat to U.S. military personnel or U.S. military facilities; (3) potential intelligence value; (4) is a member of al Qaeda or a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda or (5) such other matters as the President considers appropriate. The President must submit the regulations and guidance to the appropriate committees of Congress no later than 60 days after enactment.

To the extent possible, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must make a preliminary determination whether the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent within 48 hours of taking detainee into custody.

The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must submit its determination to the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  The Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General make a final determination and report the determination to the President and the appropriate committees of Congress.  In the case of any disagreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, the President will make the determination. 

An "unprivileged enemy combatant" is anyone who is not a "privileged combatant"; i.e., anyone not in uniform. In other words, any civilian labeled "enemy combatant" is automatically an "unprivileged enemy combatant". 

How long may such person be held? Section 5:

An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 15 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities.

Forever.

I Didn't Think It Was Possible to Drive Ann Althouse Crazier Than She Already Is

But this makes her nuttier:

 

That photo might look familiar to some of the Philly liberal crowd. Hilarious.

11th Circuit Affirms $20,000 Sanction Against Orly Taitz

I sense jail for contempt of court is coming for someone:

California attorney and “birther” proponent Orly Taitz must pay $20,000 in sanctions, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday.

In the two-page decision, the appeals court states that after considering Taitz’ arguments, “we find them unpersuasive and therefore affirm the district court’s sanctions judgment.”

Taitz has said she has no intention of complying with the court's order. I presume that she will next seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.

A Tale of Two Blogs

Love wins, bigots fume.

Earth Tones and Teleprompters

The point of rightwing zombie lies like "Obama can't talk without a teleprompter" (despite vivid evidence to the contrary) is, as Duncan says, to provide a hook for "journalists" to base their stories on. But to be effective, the lie has to join up with some widely-accepted public perception of the person being lied about. In Al Gore's case, people were prepared to believe that he was a wimpy tree-hugger who had to consult with a woman on what clothes to wear. But what are the rightwingers trying to say about Obama? That he's not as smart as he seems? Or that he's inauthentic, scripted, rigid? Maybe both. Look for clues in future lies and talking points.

Don't You Worry Your Pretty Little Head

Messaging, people. Messaging:

"Women sometimes need a little more handholding, or they need their friends to help them make a decision. And by our going in and talking to them and recruiting and educating and training them to either get involved in a campaign or become a candidate, we're giving them the tools so that they can do that on their own," [Republican National Committee co-chair Jan] Larimer added.

Why not just have a big strong GOP Daddy tell them what to do? Chicks dig that.

(Via Unstable Isotope.)

What Cole Said

This:

I honestly have no patience to read through months of the insane scribblings of some PUMA nitwit to figure this all out, so I will just stick with what I know- Kevin K. is a solid dude and anything he needs, I will help him.

There seems to have been a new outbreak of panty-sniffing on the right the last few weeks. Some of the usual suspects in the Malkinverse were all worked up about some jackass writing letters to newspapers and decided to put on their sleuthing hats and out him. Nothing gets the amateur detective shut-ins in the right blogosphere harder than posting a screenshot publicly avaliable information and then patting themselves on the back about their investigative prowess.

As angry as I ever get about the right, it never occurs to me to try to go after their families. 

But did you know that Mithras is the god of Light? It's true.

Tiller's Killer Guilty on All Counts

Now this is how you handle a terrorist:

After 37 minutes of deliberation, a jury today found Scott Roeder guilty of first-degree murder in the shooting death of Wichita abortion doctor George Tiller.

Jurors also convicted Roeder of two counts of aggravated assault for threatening two men who chased him as he fled Tiller’s church after the shooting.

Sedgwick County District Judge Warren Wilbert set Roeder’s sentencing for March 9. Roeder faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.

The prosecution said it will pursue a “hard 50” sentence, which means 50 years in prison with no chance of parole.

Read him his Miranda rights, gave him a fair trial and counsel of his choosing, and everything. 

The trial also made clear that the terrorist Roeder had been influenced by then-Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline's unsuccessful attempts to prosecute Tiller for performing illegal abortions. This is a prime example of how anti-abortion "murder" rhetoric leads directly to actual murder.

Bwahahahaha

This sounds serious:

Alleging a plot to wiretap Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu's office in the Hale Boggs Federal Building in downtown New Orleans, the FBI arrested four people Monday, including James O'Keefe, a conservative filmmaker whose undercover videos at ACORN field offices severely damaged the advocacy group's credibility.

Also arrested were Joseph Basel, Stan Dai and Robert Flanagan, all 24. Flanagan is the son of William Flanagan, who is the acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, the office confirmed. All four were charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony.

O'Keefe's confederates dressed up as telephone company employees, which I think is as serious a crime as the wiretapping. Buh bye.

(Via Unstable Isotope.)

Pop Quiz

Regarding this quote:

"My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals," [he told the] crowd. "You know why? Because they breed."

Who said it?

1. A person speaking at a city council meeting near Columbus, Ohio that was considering an animal-welfare ordinance.
2. A hunting advocate addressing the destruction caused by excess deer population at a public meeting of the state Pennsylvania Game Commission in Harrisburg, PA.
3. A South Carolina Republican gubernatorial candidate talking about people on public assistance at a townhall meeting in Fountain Inn, SC.

Answer below the fold.

My Nominee for Wanker of the Day

Rick Moran.

"... And We'll Say No More About It."

Craig Ferguson:

(Via Stephen Silver.)

Field Negro asks, "Dear God, is it too late to trade one fat rich drug addict for 50,000 Haitians?"

Intended Consequences

Christians in action:

For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how “the gay movement is an evil institution” whose goal is “to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.” 

Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior. ...

 The three Americans who spoke at the conference — Scott Lively, a missionary who has written several books against homosexuality, including “7 Steps to Recruit-Proof Your Child”; Caleb Lee Brundidge, a self-described former gay man who leads “healing seminars”; and Don Schmierer, a board member of Exodus International, whose mission is “mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality” — are now trying to distance themselves from the bill. 

“I feel duped,” Mr. Schmierer said, arguing that he had been invited to speak on “parenting skills” for families with gay children. He acknowledged telling audiences how homosexuals could be converted into heterosexuals, but he said he had no idea some Ugandans were contemplating the death penalty for homosexuality. 

“That’s horrible, absolutely horrible,” he said. “Some of the nicest people I have ever met are gay people.”

The missionary Lively actually met with the Ugandan members of parliament and went over the bill with them. Lively says now he's "very disappointed that the legislation was so harsh." What? 

This is an exact parallel to the rightwingers who call abortion murder. Do they mean it? Do they even understand what it is they're saying? Some of them may be too stupid to realize that when you label something "an evil institution", some people might take you seriously. Others, though, know exactly what they're doing.

The Raghead Shepherds

The ACLU of Pennsylvania passes along an email they received:

The first question we have here at our scranton office is what is wrong with you Athiest Assholes. We recently heard on the news about the bullshit your group started at the Luzerne County Courthouse. Our economy is hurting, the spirts of our citizens are weak for many reasons, and at this time of year, many, close to all people look towards tradition as a sign of good things around the holidays. In one, threatening blow, by threatening to sue Luzerne County for helping keep hope in their citizens, you have done nothing but demoralize the area, and make yourselves look like total Assholes and Athiests. Keep you religious beliefs to yourself. Bow down to your budah or raghead or dot head, or indian gas station god, or whatever you probable domestic terrorists bow down to, and keep out of others innocent business.

This part of the closing is priceless:

Proof read and approved by a company office of over 100!

I love that a hundred of them can't spell "proofread" or "atheist".

Stop Stealing My Line

In center city Philly today I spotted a Lexus with a 1-20-13 bumper sticker.

Someone's Wrong on the Internet

Over at snopes, of the 60 items on their "What's New" page, 13 are wingnut obsessions:

• Photograph purportedly shows Barack and Michelle Obama saluting the U.S. flag with their left hands.
• Account describes a purported "dry run" by Muslim terrorists on an AirTran flight.
• Letter purportedly written by nonagenarian Navy veteran criticizes President Obama.
• Does a 'Cap and Trade energy bill' require that all existing properties must meet new energy standards before they can be sold?
• A Thanksgiving advertising circular issued by Best Buy wishes readers a "Happy Eid al-Adha."
• Was accused Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan 'an advisor to the Obama Homeland Security team'?
• Photograph shows President Obama during a 2009 Veterans Day ceremony?
• Has a federal judge ordered Barack Obama to prove his eligibility for the presidency in court on 26 January 2010?
• What happened to the FOX News documentary on Barack Obama?
• Essay by J.D. Pendry criticizes foreign policy stances of Democratic politicians.
• Does an Obama administration program provide free cell phones and cellular service to welfare recipients?
• Did Barack Obama's thesis for Columbia University, entitled "Aristocracy Reborn," note that America's founding fathers "did not allow for economic freedom"?
• Did a June 2004 Associated Press article identify Barack Obama as 'Kenyan-born'?

So about 22% of crazy shit online is rightwing noise. Good to have that quantified.

Lies and the Lying Liars

Remember that claim wingers made that Obama had too few people with private sector experience in his administration? Yep.

After Weighing the Evidence Carefully, I'd Say You're Nuts

Gun nut Dave Kopel is becoming my fav Volokhian:

My view is that there is not a scintilla of evidence to suggest that our President is a jihadi.

Just his view, ya understand. Not saying it's not possible Obama is a jihadi bent on destroying the U.S.  Funny stuff then follows in comments: Some say jihadis are more respectable than Obama, the rest of us laugh.

This Protest Sponsored By Your Local Gigantic Health Insurance Company

I drove past the corner of 20th & Market in center city Philadelphia today, and on the southeast corner was a demonstration against the health care reform bill. There were at least six people, one of them had an American flag and another had a Gadsden flag ("Dont Tread on Me"), and there was some kind of sign about "freedom". I then noticed a young man who looked like he had taken his jacket and tie off who was handing out literature. It was then that I twigged to the fact that Blue Cross is on that block.  Subtle, guys.

I wish I had gotten a picture, but I was laughing too hard.

Edelweiss and Anthrax

Over at Volokh, professional gun nut David Kopel looks at a Newsweek cover ("How Do You Solve a Problem Like Sarah?") and sees a strong likeness between Sarah Palin and -- wait for it - Maria from The Sound of Music:

[The Mother Superior] ships Maria off to a job outside the abbey–a job for which Maria is totally unprepared, and a job at which Maria’s predecessors have failed. After a rough start, Maria becomes a great success, due to her common sense, kind heart, wisdom, and readiness to defy convention. In the process, Maria also stands up to foreign totalitarian aggressors (winning the support of even her staunch critic Berthe), fortifies the nationalist sentiments of her country against those aggressors, and leads the people in her care to safety and freedom.

Ergo, the question “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?’ provides its own answer, at least to people who know the film from which the song comes: Make her the President of the United States.

Ergo, motherfucker! He then disavows actually wanting Palin to become President; he's just saying Newsweek hates her but is accidentally making her look really good.

This from one of the supposedly intellectual rightwing blogs.

Hilarity results in the comments including, among other things, that Kopel totally misunderstands the song.

Obama as Prof. Xavier

I perked up when I saw this headline over at the Heritage Foundation's blog:

Pelosi Plan Would Give Health Czar Super Powers

I'm thinking, "Telepathy, that's what that official needs! No, not telepathy -- a superhuman capacity to put up with bullshit." Because it turns out there are no mutant powers, it's just Heritage being total whackjobs again. Anyone who has even read the smallest part about what they're referring to will understand they're nuts. Or lying. Or both.